Tech Insider					     Technology and Trends


			      USENET Archives

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site nsc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!nsc!chuqui
From: chu...@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: net.micro.atari,net.micro.mac
Subject: DRI agrees to change GEM
Message-ID: <3208@nsc.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 1-Oct-85 15:43:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: nsc.3208
Posted: Tue Oct  1 15:43:44 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 3-Oct-85 07:18:02 EDT
Organization: Ninja Ewok Training Grounds
Lines: 13

There is an article in the 10/1 issue of the San Jose Mecury News with the
announcement that DRI has agreed to (effective 11/15) stop supporting the
current version of GEM and to ship a modified version to avoid charges of
copyright violations of Apple's software. Apple has claimed that GEM copied
"The look and feel" or its Macintosh software and violated Apple's
copyright. GEM uses, among other things, windowns, drop-down menus, and
icons that substantially resemble the Mac.

-- 
:From under the bar at Callahan's:   Chuq Von Rospach 
nsc!chu...@decwrl.ARPA               {decwrl,hplabs,ihnp4,pyramid}!nsc!chuqui

If you can't talk below a bellow, you can't talk...

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2.fluke 9/24/84; site vax1.fluke.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!
uw-beaver!fluke!pwv
From: p...@fluke.UUCP (Pat Vilbrandt)
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc,net.micro.atari,net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: DRI agrees to change GEM
Message-ID: <1196@vax1.fluke.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 3-Oct-85 11:23:57 EDT
Article-I.D.: vax1.1196
Posted: Thu Oct  3 11:23:57 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 4-Oct-85 06:29:26 EDT
References: <3208@nsc.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Lines: 55
Keywords: Apple, GEM, Copyright

This is the announcement by Digital Research, Inc. as it appeared on the 
Compuserve GEM SIG on Oct. 1.  Seems as though DRI could use some better
lawers.  (Maybe Xerox should sue Apple...  :-)

========================================================================

     Apple Computer and DRI today announced that DRI will take 
immediate measures to make changes to its GEM computer programs 
to avoid Apple's claims that the programs violate Apple's 
copywrights.  DRI states that these changes also prepare the way 
for future enhancements to DRI's GEM products.

     DRI agreed with Apple that is was beneficial to 
substantially differentiate DRI's products and avoid any 
possibility of infringement of Apple's copyrights.

     GEM, which started shipping in April, is a portable 
operating system extension available for use on a number of 
personal computers.  GEM is based on a graphics user interface 
which uses windows, drop-down menus and icons.  DRI has licensed 
GEM to a number of personal computer manufacturers.

     DRI also agreed to alter the style and format of its 
advertising and not to engage in comparative advertising with 
Apple products.  DRI has agreed to disclaim any GEM program 
compatibility with Apple products and to state that GEM programs 
and Apple programs do not perform in the same manner.

     In a signed document, DRI agreed to produce new versions of 
GEM, designed to be substantially different than Apple's 
Macintosh personal computer in both screen appearance and 
operation.  These changes are being reviewed by Apple to insure 
they satisfy Apple's requirement that GEM programs no longer 
appear to be substantially similar to Apple's programs.  The 
specific programs to be modifided by DRI as soon as possible are 
GEM Desktop, GEM Paint and GEM Draw.  When the new versions are 
made available to DRI's OEM and retail customers, the older 
versions will no longer continue to be marketed.  The current GEM 
programs will operate in the new GEM environment.

     As part of a compromise and settlement, DRI has agreed to 
pay Apple an undiscolosed amount and to work on Apple's software 
development projects but denies any infringement of any Apple 
rights.  DRI and Apple have further agreed to engage in future 
software developments.

-- 

   Pat Vilbrandt
   John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc.
   Everett, Washington USA
UUCP:
   { decvax!uw-beaver, ucbvax!lbl-csam, allegra, ssc-vax, decwrl!sun }!fluke!pwv
ARPA:
	fluke!...@uw-beaver.ARPA

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site nsc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!qantel!hplabs!nsc!chuqui
From: chu...@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc,net.micro.atari,net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: DRI agrees to change GEM
Message-ID: <3226@nsc.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 5-Oct-85 10:48:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: nsc.3226
Posted: Sat Oct  5 10:48:41 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 7-Oct-85 04:45:35 EDT
References: <3208@nsc.UUCP> <1196@vax1.fluke.UUCP>
Reply-To: chu...@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Distribution: net
Organization: Ninja Ewok Training Grounds
Lines: 15
Keywords: Apple, GEM, Copyright

In article <1...@vax1.fluke.UUCP> p...@fluke.UUCP (Pat Vilbrandt) writes:
>This is the announcement by Digital Research, Inc. as it appeared on the 
>Compuserve GEM SIG on Oct. 1.  Seems as though DRI could use some better
>lawers.  (Maybe Xerox should sue Apple...  :-)

Anyone who's seen a Xerox (anyone with a dandelion want to comment?) will
be the first to admit similarities, but Apple went very strongly out in
their own direction. The Mac isn't a copy of Xerox' work, it is just
influenced by it. From what the releases say, that isn't as true of the Mac
and GEM (I haven't seen GEM yet, so I won't comment on it).
-- 
:From under the bar at Callahan's:   Chuq Von Rospach 
nsc!chu...@decwrl.ARPA               {decwrl,hplabs,ihnp4,pyramid}!nsc!chuqui

If you can't talk below a bellow, you can't talk...

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!ucbvax!
simtel20.arpa!MRC
From: M...@SIMTEL20.ARPA (Mark Crispin)
Newsgroups: net.micro.atari
Subject: Re: DRI agrees to change GEM
Message-ID: <12148757255.8.MRC@SIMTEL20.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 5-Oct-85 15:56:45 EDT
Article-I.D.: SIMTEL20.12148757255.8.MRC
Posted: Sat Oct  5 15:56:45 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 6-Oct-85 06:35:46 EDT
References: <2750@vax4.fluke.UUCP>
Sender: dae...@ucbvax.ARPA
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 16

It is easy to put in patents and copyrights which are complete bullsh-t.
They are "valid" as long as nobody contests it.  DEC still claims a patent
on the PDP-10 byte instructions even though they'd lose a real court fight
on it (and have failed to sue Xerox, Foonly, Tymshare, and Systems Concepts
for building imitation PDP-10's).

There is a difference between a patent and a copyright.  What Apple apparently
has is a patent, since a copyright would not prevent anybody from recreating
from scratch software with the same functionality (consider the GNU effort).
I seriously doubt the patent would hold up against a worthy opponent.  DRI
probably caved in because they want Apple as a customer.

Face it, Apple, Commodore, and Atari are glorified toy companies and behave
just like toy companies, not like vendors of professional equipment.  Not a
single idea on the Mac is original with Apple.
-------

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-eddie.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!think!mit-eddie!barmar
From: bar...@mit-eddie.UUCP (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc,net.micro.atari,net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: DRI agrees to change GEM
Message-ID: <27@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 7-Oct-85 04:50:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.27
Posted: Mon Oct  7 04:50:47 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 9-Oct-85 06:01:32 EDT
References: <3208@nsc.UUCP> <1196@vax1.fluke.UUCP> <3226@nsc.UUCP>
Reply-To: bar...@mit-eddie.UUCP (Barry Margolin)
Distribution: net
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 32

In article <3...@nsc.UUCP> chu...@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach) writes:
>Anyone who's seen a Xerox (anyone with a dandelion want to comment?) will
>be the first to admit similarities, but Apple went very strongly out in
>their own direction. The Mac isn't a copy of Xerox' work, it is just
>influenced by it. From what the releases say, that isn't as true of the Mac
>and GEM (I haven't seen GEM yet, so I won't comment on it).

I haven't seen any of the recent Xerox workstations (I used the Alto a
little), but I figured this was the case.  Xerox introduced (or at least
popularized) the mouse and icons, but the detailed approaches are quite
different.  I believe that their interface was based primarily on
dragging icons to other icons, which only survives in the Finder as the
Trash and copying files -- in Xerox systems, one would print a file by
dragging it to the printer icon, and I think one would invoke a program
on a file by dragging the file to the program's icon (I think the
printer and trash can were just particular cases of this general
facility).

I have used GEM a little, and it is a very close copy of the Mac.  The
standard desktop icons are in the same places (disk icons in top right,
trash can in bottom right), the standard menus are almost identical, and
window manipulation is the same (GEM added a minor extension: a "grow to
full screen" icon in the top right corner of windows).  According to an
article in Macworld by one of the Lisa developers, pull-down menus and
double-clicking to open objects were innovations of the Lisa team, and
GEM copied these exactly.  Anyone who knows how to use the Mac Finder
can sit down and feel perfectly comfortable with Gem Desktop; I doubt
that the same could be said about the Dandelion.
-- 
    Barry Margolin
    ARPA: barmar@MIT-Multics
    UUCP: ..!genrad!mit-eddie!barmar

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 (Fortune 01.1b1); site graffiti.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!
bellcore!decvax!ucbvax!ucdavis!lll-crg!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!shell!graffiti!peter
From: pe...@graffiti.UUCP (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: net.micro.atari
Subject: Re: DRI agrees to change GEM
Message-ID: <279@graffiti.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 9-Oct-85 07:29:11 EDT
Article-I.D.: graffiti.279
Posted: Wed Oct  9 07:29:11 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 14-Oct-85 06:12:42 EDT
References: <2750@vax4.fluke.UUCP> <12148757255.8.MRC@SIMTEL20.ARPA>
Organization: The Power Elite, Houston, TX
Lines: 10

> There is a difference between a patent and a copyright.  What Apple apparently
> has is a patent, since a copyright would not prevent anybody from recreating
> from scratch software with the same functionality (consider the GNU effort).

Yes it could. Look at the PAC-MAN wars a while ago. Apple is suing DRI on the
exact same grounds. They're almost certain to go after AMIGA next. I'm mad as
hell about this bovine excrement, myself. GEM isn't even anywhere near being a
good copy of the Mac desktop in function: it just looks like it. Also, UNIX
isn't protected by patent (except for set-uid bits) or copyright, but by trade-
secret protection (they reckon it's too hard to reverse engineer, I guess).

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1.chuqui 4/7/84; site apple.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!nsc!voder!apple!lsr
From: l...@apple.UUCP (Larry Rosenstein)
Newsgroups: net.micro.atari
Subject: Re: DRI agrees to change GEM
Message-ID: <2108@apple.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 16-Oct-85 21:10:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: apple.2108
Posted: Wed Oct 16 21:10:56 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 18-Oct-85 01:15:57 EDT
References: <2750@vax4.fluke.UUCP> <12148757255.8.MRC@SIMTEL20.ARPA> 
<279@graffiti.UUCP>
Reply-To: l...@apple.UUCP (Larry Rosenstein)
Organization: Advanced Development Group, Apple Computer
Lines: 13

In article <2...@graffiti.UUCP> pe...@graffiti.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes:
>...
>                                          GEM isn't even anywhere near being a
>good copy of the Mac desktop in function: it just looks like it. 

That was the whole point.

-- 
Larry Rosenstein
Apple Computer

UUCP:  {voder, nsc, ios, mtxinu, dual}!apple!lsr
CSNET: l...@Apple.CSNET

			        About USENET

USENET (Users’ Network) was a bulletin board shared among many computer
systems around the world. USENET was a logical network, sitting on top
of several physical networks, among them UUCP, BLICN, BERKNET, X.25, and
the ARPANET. Sites on USENET included many universities, private companies
and research organizations. See USENET Archives.

		       SCO Files Lawsuit Against IBM

March 7, 2003 - The SCO Group filed legal action against IBM in the State 
Court of Utah for trade secrets misappropriation, tortious interference, 
unfair competition and breach of contract. The complaint alleges that IBM 
made concentrated efforts to improperly destroy the economic value of 
UNIX, particularly UNIX on Intel, to benefit IBM's Linux services 
business. See SCO vs IBM.

The materials and information included in this website may only be used
for purposes such as criticism, review, private study, scholarship, or
research.

Electronic mail:			       WorldWideWeb:
   tech-insider@outlook.com			  http://tech-insider.org/